At this year’s Aspen Security Forum (which I co-chair) in July, China’s ambassador to the United States, Qin Gang, appealed for better understanding of his country. But there was considerable debate among the assembled experts about China’s objectives. President Xi Jinping has announced China’s intention to outpace America in critical technologies such as artificial intelligence and synthetic biology by 2030, and many analysts predict that China’s GDP (measured at market exchange rates) will surpass that of the US early in the next decade. Is China seeking to displace the US as the world’s leading power by the centenary of communist rule in 2049?

The dominant narrative on the Chinese side is that this strategic competition between the two countries reflects the struggles for power, institutions, and perceptions, which will last throughout the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. In general, it is thus believed that competition and struggle have been adopted as key words for both Washington and Beijing in managing their relations.

The U.S. secretary of state restated and reinforced the Biden administration’s approach, proposing an “invest, align, compete” strategy for success over China. The speech revealed significant clues about the features of America’s basic strategic game ahead.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken delivered his speech on the Biden administration’s approach to China last week. While he laid out a laundry list of China-U.S. policy issues, the administration must now actively fashion an integrated strategy to deal with the ongoing challenges presented by Beijing.

The demonization of China that began during the Trump presidency has persisted. Bilateral relations are morphing from a competition over interests to a struggle over values and identity. The near future looks bleak, but there’s hope further down the road.

Expect China and the U.S. to remain in a state of strategic stalemate for a long time. The most dangerous moments in bilateral ties will be when the two countries strengths bump against one another. We must be fully prepared for that.

The positive turn initiated by Richard Nixon 50 years ago seems to have ground to a halt. The China-U.S. relationship has hit a low point. But while America has come to regard China as its primary strategic competitor, there are ways to get back on track.

Past experience is a guide for the future, so what can we learn today from the normalization of China-U.S. relations? First, we must be realistic. Second, we must be willing to break conventional rules.

By starting and sustaining a tech war against China, Washington has placed itself on the wrong side of history. Like its trade war, the battle in the high-technology sector will turn out to be difficult to win.

American anxiety about China shows that China has become a “near-peer” competitor to the United States. But the process of competition will not be dictated by the U.S. alone. The impact will only be revealed through interaction over time and the handling of key issues.